4.2 Review

Optimizing Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Angiography in Reconstructive Flap Surgery: A Systematic Review and Ex Vivo Experiments

Journal

SURGICAL INNOVATION
Volume 27, Issue 1, Pages 103-119

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1553350619862097

Keywords

image-guided surgery; breast surgery; evidence-based medicine; surgery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) offers the potential to provide objective data for evaluating tissue perfusion of flaps and reduce the incidence of postoperative necrosis. Consensus on ICGA protocols and information on factors that have an influence on fluorescence intensity is lacking. The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive insight of in vivo and ex vivo evaluation of factors influencing the fluorescence intensity when using ICGA during reconstructive flap surgery. Methods. A systematic literature search was conducted to provide a comprehensive overview of currently used ICGA protocols in reconstructive flap surgery. Additionally, ex vivo experiments were performed to further investigate the practical influence of potentially relevant factors. Results. Factors that are considered important in ICGA protocols, as well as factors that might influence fluorescence intensity are scarcely reported. The ex vivo experiments demonstrated that fluorescence intensity was significantly related to dose, working distance, angle, penetration depth, and ambient light. Conclusions. This study identified factors that significantly influence the fluorescence intensity of ICGA. Applying a weight-adjusted ICG dose seems preferable over a fixed dose, recommended working distances are advocated, and the imaging head during ICGA should be positioned in an angle of 60 degrees to 90 degrees without significantly influencing the fluorescence intensity. All of these factors should be considered and reported when using ICGA for tissue perfusion assessment during reconstructive flap surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available